High Court Kerala High Court

Subhashkumar vs State Of Kerala on 29 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Subhashkumar vs State Of Kerala on 29 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 1604 of 2010()


1. SUBHASHKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.NIREESH MATHEW

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :29/03/2010

 O R D E R
                         K.T.SANKARAN, J.
            ------------------------------------------------------
                      B.A. NO. 1604 OF 2010
            ------------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 29th day of March, 2010


                               O R D E R

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.3 in

C.R.No.23 of 2008 of Adoor Excise Range, Pathanamthitta District.

2. The offence alleged against the accused is under Sections

56(b) and 57(a) of the Abkari Act.

3. When the Bail Application came up for hearing on

12.3.2010, the following order was passed:

“After having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of

the view that before disposing of the Bail Application,

an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to

appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly,

there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear

before the investigating officer at 9 AM on 16th and 17th

March, 2010.

B.A. NO. 1604 OF 2010

:: 2 ::

Post on 22.03.2010.

It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor

that the petitioner will not be arrested until further

orders in connection with C.R.No.23 of 2008 of Adoor

Excise Range, Pathanamthitta District.

The petitioner shall produce copy of this order

before the investigating officer.”

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as

well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction in the order

dated 12.3.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner.

5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that

the direction in the order dated 12.3.2010 has been complied with by

the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted

to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the

arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall

release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two

solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer

concerned, subject to the following conditions:

B.A. NO. 1604 OF 2010

:: 3 ::

a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating
officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate
Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further
orders;

b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating
officer for interrogation as and when required;

c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution
witnesses or tamper with the evidence;

d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in
any prejudicial activity while on bail;

e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned
above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled.

The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above.

(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge

ahz/